Friday, October 31, 2008

This is a photo from this afternoon's forward fitting of the tweed and tartan jackets.

It called a forward fitting because all the pieces are tried on before the jacket is assembled, and final cuttings (hem, vents, pockets, buttonholes, etc) take place. Its a pretty unattractive picture at this point, but in two weeks it will be completed.

I half suspect Mrs. T is planning my replacement. I base this on her TIVO recordings. Saturdays are generally spent with "Say yes to the Dress" "Bridezillas" and programs of that genre. She is making plans. I make no judgement, I merely report.

By the end of the night it's time for" My Big Redneck Wedding".

If you fancy yourself a suburban, suave sophisticate, Redneck Wedding will appall you. You'll never fathom why that man is marrying his sister, or why truck seat covers make a suitable gift for a groom to give his bride.

You gotta see the show twice. The first time you will be unable to comprehend what you just saw. Next time though, pay attention to the wedding ceremony and reception. Everyone is having a whale of a lot of fun. That's something you can't say about most suburban weddings.

Trick is don't watch it a third time. Deep down I suspect there are a lot more weddings like this than we could even imagine, and I can imagine a lot.

Don't make fun of what you don't understand. It's bad manners.

Anyway, its Halloween. Be safe, have fun. Remember that no matter whatever you were led to believe, no kid ever bit into a razor blade he picked up trick or treating. (It happened once, his step father did it and fessed up before the kid bit into it)

BTW this afternoon is the first fitting for the two tweed jackets I ordered last month. Can't wait.

I have no direct evidence to support my allegation, but I believe you could accurately mix Mrs. T's on-line usage into 4 equal categories.

In no particular order the first would be time spent taking surveys. Mrs. T can morph into any character to supply an opinion to a pollster. The woman has no unexpressed opinions.

The next would be shopping. The Internet has enabled Mrs. T, her mother and sisters to sniff out bargains two continents away. If its not Rue La La, its Overstock or Target, or...

Next is games. She is an inveterate game player. I am not, so she searches victims on line.

And last is searching samples. Remember she has no unexpressed opinions. If some company is seekingvolunteers to try a product she is first in line. Over the years we have been a one family rainbow coalition of product triers. Some products have been pretty good, most near useless. I expect an artificial leg will show up someday as a sample product.

Yesterday, she was me and I got a product to try in the mail. Gillette odor shield and body wash. Who wouldn't be excited right?

To my minds eye there are two major flaws to this product. 1) the active ingredient appears to be a washcloth. Everyone knows boys don't washcloth. 2) Subtlety, the package directions suggest that using this may reduce the need for deodorant. I find that a bad trend, and one not to be encouraged.

After seeing the commercial on TV, I look forward to the results. I only wish I were 25 years younger. I can't wait for Saturday to try it.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Allow me to rat myself out. Pig that I am, my barber is a very attractive brunette who is about the same age as the car I drove to get to the barber shop, but about half as old as the shoes, which I purchased new, wore that day.

In my defence, my next door neighbor owns the shop, and she selected the "stylist" for me..

All in all, she hasn't much to work with, and I am happy with the results, so I continue to go.

The day I went, HSM3 was released and she was very excited to see it. I mentioned my 8 yo grand daughter had also lost sleep in anticipation. But the Barber continued that she was still a kid at heart, and had ALL the Disney animated movies on VHS. I couldn't let this go on much further, so I told her she most certainly did not. Then the litany began.

Well she did have quite a few, even the earliest ones.

But still she did not have them all, in fact had never heard of this one.

I have worn Topsiders for some part of every day, with very few exceptions, for the past 45 years. Only in brown please, as I live a thousand miles from the nearest ocean and haven't been on a sailboat in 25 years.

Topsiders are the perfect shoe, but you already know that. Now Sperry have gone and done this. As if the crocodile version wasn't gaudy enough I present for your edification Topsider chukka boots. No, even if you spend your own money, you may not buy these, and you will not associate with those that do.

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Until the Carter era, gas lanterns were pretty much the standard. In front of every suburban yard was a gas lamppost. After the oil embargo, folks either removed them all together, or converted them to electric. Things haven't been the same since.

As it works for me, I just kinda forgot how elegant the gas lamps were until I was last in New Orleans for bonus son 2's Tulane graduation. The Garden District, this was the spring before Katrina, was alight with gas. It brought back many memories.

For about a year, I have been reading Carolina Lanterns catalog, like a pre teen boy reading that magazine with the rabbits, lusting over where we could best utilize the warmth and glow of the perfect gas lamp. My longings were not aided by the knowledge that the gas man came to our house with a big truck several times a year in exchange for a large check, and that post Katrina gas prices were not to be trifled with.

So I have begun a limited search now that oil prices are a bit more reasonable, and Carolina Lanterns now have electric start models you can turn on and off at whim.

Monday, October 27, 2008

Sometime Sunday I was reading a blog, or newspaper account of perfect products. The author mentioned Topsiders and 501 Levis amongst others.

My list would include Ticonderoga #2 pencils, Gillette Good News Razors and books. Not every book naturally, but the concept of books. They arouse almost all the senses. They are portable, feel good in the hand, some are physically beautiful. They are a joy to own and hold.

Lately, Oprah has endorsed a product called Kindle. Its a portable, electronic book reader approximately the size of a legal pad. The deal is you spend $300 for the reader, and you can wirelessly download virtually any book from Amazon, etc. for under $10. Allegedly, the Kindle holds several hundred books at once and has available memory cards for more storage.

Mrs T has made several stabs at tempting me to try one on. She has also sung this song to virtually every family member who would listen, to little or no avail. I gag at the thought, except...

There may be one application where this makes sense. Girl College Students

According to the Kindle web site, text books are down loadable too. While my knowledge isn't current, I remember college textbooks to be backbreakingly expensive, and rarely read. Downloading texts at 10 bucks just might make this practical. Boys would either lose it, or never use it, and they rarely buy the books anyway.

What do you think? Is it time to begin Christmas shopping?

Sony also has a similar product for $300 on sale at Target this week which includes 101 downloads, and the Oprah web site has a $50 off coupon code for a Kindle good for the next week or so.

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Something in my Celtic DNA makes me love this love the Halloween season. I wait all year for this. It's my super bowl, my world series, my St. Patricks Day, my best month of all.

For me Halloween season runs from the week proceeding All Hallows Eve until the monday after Thanksgiving. It includes Halloween prep, The day of the Dead, Election Day, Katy Day, all the exciting Thanksgiving prepartions, the big day and let down afterwards after everyone returns to school or home. The rest of the year is just the waiting for this time of year.

Not that I particularly do anything special, but I do have my routines.. I reread Washington Irving's stories, epecially Rip Van Winkle and the Legend of Sleep Hollow. Build a scarecrow at the foot of the drive, watch Sleepy Hollow for the hundreth time, chop firewood, and prepare for my annual argument with Mrs. T about how much trick or treat candy we should have on hand.

This is our only major argument throughout the year. 5+ lbs each of Snickers, Butterfingers and Baby Ruths seem appropriate to me. Mrs. T sees the world through very dark glasses and believes we really don't need any. This is from a woman who lives for Christmas, go figure.

Just becasuse the grandkids are all out of town this year, and we have never had a trick or treater, nor are we ever likely to, she feels we can do without. Bunkum.

Bit of Halloween trivia. How many of you realize that it was on Halloween, 1517, that Martin Luther nailed the 95 thesis to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg Germany, beginning the Protestant Reformation?

Be safe and have fun. What kinds of fun stuff do they do in your neighborhood, maybe I'm missing out on something good?

Friday, October 24, 2008

I am most certainly not advocating that any US citizen violate Federal law, but if any of my readers hold the Trading with the Enemy Act in as low a regard as I do, especially as it relates to Cuban cigars, may I suggest that you closely investigate EURO denominated, tax free sellers.

At current exchange rates, Cuban Puros are priced substantially less than their Dominican namesakes.

I have no idea how this happens, other than perhaps via the ramblings of an unstructered brain, but what I most enjoy about blogs and bloggers is the unforseen paths they lead me down.

I'm certain you too have been down this lane. You read a blog and like it, follow a link or two of their favorite blogs, read the comments follow a couple of them, you never know where you'll end up, but it's always an hour later.

For instance, I have found several great books, I would have never heard of, this way. Whoever suggested "Thirty Nine Steps" I thank you. Ms. Mindless I thank you for your erudite explanation of not only the photo but derivation of Tuesday's post. I hope the illustration touches upon the subject.

To the many others who have commented publically or otherwise on or about TTMB I am grateful, especially to those who have taken me to task.

But best of all I appreciate the window the blogging community offers to open my mind, clear the cobwebs, learn new things, meet new people and see things I would never have never seen, have access to, or even considered. Ideas that may be out of my cultural or comfort zone, or those which let me offer suggestions or bits of advice on topics I actually know something about.

I'm often amazed by the "glad I was there" kind of feeling that comes from connecting to someone's story.

Picks and Pans

Picks: If you have young boys at your house you probably know this one. Have you ever seen "Back to the Barnyard" on Nick? Young Grandson was over the other day and turned it on. I nearly hurt myself laughing.

Pans: Mrs. T and I have differing views of what to watch on television. My tastes are neither better nor worse than hers, just different.

Thanks to TIVO I was subjected to a round of The desperate (sorry, real) housewives of Atlanta last evening.

Several comments and questions ensue:

1. Am I the only idiot who believes that Kim's secret boytoy is married?

2. Why do I think the only endearing person on that show is NeNe's husband?

3. Do they still have names for girls who trade favors for stuff?

Pan 2: I am a lifelong Anglophile. A pyschologist could probably have a field day attempting to understand why, but let us all agree that I am. Somehow, I came across a copy of the book, "The Anglo files, a field guide to the British" by Sarah Lyall, a New York Times reporter married to an Englishman and living in London. Sounds like mothers milk doesn't it?

I was terribly disappointed with it. Perhaps I am, along with being an Anglophile, also something of a puritan, but I was put out by Ms. Lyall wasting a chapter on the excessive British usage of a "word I can barely type" -her quote. A 4 letter, female perjoritive beginning with ****.

I think one of the few pleasures available to an author, is the privelege of writing what you want to write about. If the word offends, why spend time with it, much less a chapter. Certainly I didn't.

In conclusion, as Dr. Pangloss said, "This is the best of all possible worlds". It's our job to make it so. Enjoy your weekend. You've earned it. As long as you have gotten this far, stop in and say hello.

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Mayberry, which resides on the cusp of USDA zones 5b and 5a must be the end of the practical northern range for my favorite tree,the glorious Southern Magnolia Grandiflora. Most here are foundation plantings protected from winter winds by being planted too close to tall brick walls.

The Park has one, which is perhaps 20 years old, is badly pruned and rather spindly. It was my mission this year to take this great specimen under my black growing thumb and store it to glory.

My first task began in early spring. Each month I'd get a 5 gallon bucket of water and Mir Acid and soak the the base of the tree. It had been a glorious spring and summer. Not too hot, not too cool, with plenty of rain. Maggy rewarded my efforts with a provision of pale yellow, highly fragrant flowers, which grew out of harms way from our large rodents.Since the pool closed for the season, I had not paid attention to it for a while. Until yesterday, when I was raking leaves. There are now a profusion of cones and seeds. I know it hadn't done that the previous 2 falls we have been here.

Keep in mind that I have zero experience with Magnolia trees, but I think Maggy was trying to thank me.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Twice in my life I have lived in Kansas City. Once as a child and later as an adult. Each time, coincidentally, in Mrs. Blanding's neighborhood. If you are unfamiliar with her blog, I insist you click on the link on the right, and make her a must read.

One of the neighborhood landmarks is Southwest High School, which as far as I know has only 3 claims to fame. It is the Alma Mater of Calvin Trillin, of New Yorker fame,and it is where I took early swimming lessons, on very cold Saturday mornings, and its where the local Y has its baseball and football fields, where I spent many a enjoyable hour.

I mention Calvin Trillin for two reasons. First, if you are unfamiliar with his writing, I must acquaint you with it. CT is one of the great food writers in America. A great introduction would be his " Tummy Trilogy" a collection of three books, "American Fried"," Alice, Let's Eat", and "Third Helpings". Each book is a collection of stories about Trillin and his friends looking for something good to eat.

The second is to introduce one of the foils in the Trillin trilogy, my alter ego," The man with the Naugahydepalette". Almost all food was too exotic for his tastes.

I am a man of many blessings, few of which I take for granted, none purposefully. One of my greatest blessings is that I have a wife who is an imaginative and creative cook. Trained in classic French and Italian technique, she can whip up a masterpiece in moments. Her specialties are sauces, pastas and cheese dishes.

However, my blessing is her curse. I too am a man with a Naugahydepalette. The list of things I will not eat is far longer than what I will. My no list includes such staples, as cheese, pasta, sauces, vegetables, spices. I think you get the point. I am driving her abso-positively insane.

It's not like she didn't know this when we married. She figured, as most women will, that once she had her fangs in she could fix me. It's been a struggle for her, but it hasn't happened yet.

Sometimes I think she is coming around, but deep down I know better.

If you have any ideas for either of us on how to surmount this hurdle let me know.

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Come Home Celebrations are new to me, but the concept is one I am far too familiar with, and likely to become only more so. For those of you not in the know, it's a funeral.

I have googled the term, searched arcane regional dictionaries, and otherwise made a nuisance of myself attempting to find the origins and derivation of this phrase and have come to naught. It must have been created recently by a theological committee with too much time and too much imagination on their hands in an attempt to get back at we non believers. I can't see this catching on.

Unless, is this an AA, or other ethnic usage? To coin a phrase, "I'm dying to know". Anyone have any ideas?

Monday, October 20, 2008

This photo was taken at a political rally in St. Louis this past weekend. Let me point out several local landmarks. The white building in the background is the Old Courthouse, scene of the early Dred Scott trials in the 1850's. There is a street behind the speaker, and directly across the street is a Catholic Church, known as the Old Cathedral. Behind the Old Cathedral is the Arch, and St. Louis riverfront.

Several months ago, a young couple was planning their wedding. They checked the calendar to make certain that the Cardinals would not be playing, and that the Blues hockey team was not in town. Thus assured, they scheduled their Old Cathedral wedding, for 12pm Saturday.

Local reports suggest that nearly 100,000 attended the noon rally which was immediately outside the church door. Supposedly, the local police did an exemplary job in getting the wedding party and guests to the church on time.

Report in Sunday's paper indicated that the bride's family was still planning on voting for the other guy.

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Take a look at a map of the United States. Ever wonder how or why the states are shaped the way they are? Why don't borders match where logic says they should? Why are some large, and some small? Oddly enough, a great deal of thought went into each bend, bootheel, and arc., and this book is here to tell you why.

Mr. Stein's book "How the states got their shapes" is a state by state history and geography lesson on how the American states shapes evolved. In amazing detail he tells of pre colonial land grants, wars with foreign powers, territorial mineral wars, shifts in river banks, voting blocs, slave and non slave states. Is all here, in elaborate detail, yet concise and highly readable.

I highly recommend it.

PANS

I am not a frequent EBAY shopper, but I well understand its utility, and as an asylum for American's pack rats it was a genious invention.

To me, its greatest innovation was the feedback mechanism. The original idea that buyers and sellers could rate each other on how well they performed was insanely great. Somehow though, the whole idea became corrupted by the inmates and then EBAY f'ed it up even worse.

While I appreciate the notion of feedback, somehow I never caught on to the idea that as a buyer, I had to furnish feedback first. It seems to me if I won an auction and paid for the item, I'd completed my end of the bargain and feedback was due NOW! not after I received the goods and stroked the seller a bit.

Consequently, I have never provided feedback to sellers who did not see things my way. You'd be amazed at how testy they become.

Recently, EBAY pissed in the pool by requiring sellers to provide positive feedback if they met the basic terms of the sale, ie: won and paid. Becomes sorta meaningless at that point.

So now feedback has become ingrained in the fabric of internet sales. I hope it catches on. I always appreciate things that save me from myself.

Friday, October 17, 2008

A faithful reader got in touch the other day with he suggestion that the reason I did not like NFL football was that I'd never seen it done right, like they do on the western side of Missouri. The suggestion was followed up with invitations for Mrs. T and I to join him in his company's suite Sunday.

I thanked him kindly, admitted that I in fact have seen football in KC, that my first pro football experience was watching KC battle San Diego in the old KC ballpark, this was in AFL days, and that Mrs. T and I traditionally did not travel to eat with strangers.

However, I do have a son in Topeka, and asked if perhaps he and his wife could do the heavy lifting for me. Alas, no, since he wasn't preaching to the converted.

I find it refreshingly American, that people of good will would offer strangers such a gift, knowing damn good and well that it won't be accepted. Is this a great country or what.

Thursday, October 16, 2008

While writing Tuesday's post I was reminded of the day I ordered the blue jacket at Woody's.

In the store was a very good looking, young man who was picking up a new blazer. As I recall in was a black and white POW tweed check, single button with peak lapels. The coat was not only beautiful, and fit him perfectly, but had the additional detail of pink stitching around the lapel button hole. It was actually stunning, and clearly the buyer was pleased.

Mrs. T was with me that day, and she has the knack, which I lack, of starting conversations with anyone, anytime and anywhere. She immediately started up on the man with the new jacket. That is how I came to meet Mr. V.K. Nagrani, proprietor of Ovadafut, and the V.K.Nagrani line of men's accessories.

Now, some may have gotten the mistaken assumption from my David Frost post that I am a sock guy, Nothing could be further from the truth. I generally disdain socks, for all but the most serious occasions, and when proper dressing requires something around the ankle. That is where Ovadfut comes in.

Nagrani makes a line of men's hosiery which is not only comfortable but also colorful. Best of all it is mostly over the calf, which is a trifecta rarely found. When necessary their customer service is over the top, and the follow through is impeccable. I recommend them most highly.

Wednesday, October 15, 2008

About once a week I remind Mrs. T that Eliot Spitzer said he was sorry and ask her if she believes that his wife and daughters have forgiven him yet?

She is of the opinion that it may take a bit longer than the 21st. century.

So I'm curious, what power on earth gets a grieving wife onto that stage? I'd like to synthesize it, bottle it and make it available for sale. I'd be vilified like no body's business, but probably very rich.

NEXT QUESTION

In spite of my basic apolitical nature, I posit that there is a better than 50-50 shot of a black man being elected President of the United States next month. That got me thinking about race and politics in America.

African Americans, tend to name their children with more enthusiasm than whites. For example, let me offer this tidbit from Freakenomics:

"Today, more than 40 percent of the black girls born in California in a given year receive a name that not one of the roughly 100,000 baby white girls received that year. Even more remarkably, nearly 30 percent of the black girls are given a name that is unique among every baby, white and black, born that year in California."

So here's my question. If Mrs. Obama, instead of being named Michelle, had a distinctly black first name, would her husband have a snowballs chance in hell of being elected President of the free world?

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Almost three years ago, my only daughter informed us that not only was she getting married, but it was to be in May, on a beach, in Mexico. Naturally, we were over the moon, but in fact not terribly shocked, except for maybe the beach and Mexico part.

Like all fathers, I quickly took two steps back, got out of the way, and let those who have either mentally or otherwise planned weddings enjoy their planning. My input was neither solicited nor wanted.

What I did take seriously though was what I was going to wear. The groom was going to be casual, so I saw no need to take the tux to the cleaners. However, I did want to honor the bride who would be in a wedding gown, by wearing something serious, yet casual and comfortable.

I started early and looked long and hard, for ideas. Then I saw the photo above on the Grass Court Collection web site. While I am neither as trim or good looking as the model in the picture, I knew almost immediately that was the look I was going for.

Piecing it together in deep Mayberry winter was tough, and in fact it wasn't until late March that through a chance encounter at my favorite haberdashery, that I was finally able to source all the items.

My biggest problem purchasing clothes off the rack, is that for each item of clothing I wear two distinct sizes. In jackets, if my shoulders fit, the waist won't. Shirts have the same problem. Pants that fit at the waist, don't in the hips.

The most critical part of the ensemble for me was getting the jacket right. I searched long and hard to no avail. Then my friends at Woody's told me about the Made To Measure (MTM) program offered by Coppley, one of their vendors.

You take a few measurements, add a picture, select a fabric, buttons and detail and voila, in four weeks you get a jacket that was made to fit you. I loved 99% of the finished product, and would have been happy forever had I stopped there.

The results are below

Unfortunately, in my research I learned about true bespoke tailoring. A bespoke tailor after taking copious measuerments, cuts a pattern to fit only you, then cuts and sews the fabric making a truly unique garment, which meets your exact and exacting specifiations. I had to try it.

My understanding it that it takes two or three items before you and your tailor are truly in synch. My first attempt at bespoke was a white summer odd jacket which was made to my design, which was very well done, but not a very good choice of style or fabric. My next was a sport coat shown several weeks ago, which I just adore. My third is being made now, in time for Thanksgiving.

So as well as Scott Schuman I also have my darling daughter to thank. Thanks to her, when I leave home, I finally do it in clothes that fit. She never knew!

Friday, October 10, 2008

Never in living memory has an election been more critical than the one fast approaching—that’s the quadrennial cliché, as expected as the balloons and the bombast. And yet when has it ever felt so urgently true? When have so many Americans had so clear a sense that a Presidency has—at the levels of competence, vision, and integrity—undermined the country and its ideals?

The incumbent Administration has distinguished itself for the ages. The Presidency of George W. Bush is the worst since Reconstruction, so there is no mystery about why the Republican Party—which has held dominion over the executive branch of the federal government for the past eight years and the legislative branch for most of that time—has little desire to defend its record, domestic or foreign. The only speaker at the Convention in St. Paul who uttered more than a sentence or two in support of the President was his wife, Laura. Meanwhile, the nominee, John McCain, played the part of a vaudeville illusionist, asking to be regarded as an apostle of change after years of embracing the essentials of the Bush agenda with ever-increasing ardor.

The Republican disaster begins at home. Even before taking into account whatever fantastically expensive plan eventually emerges to help rescue the financial system from Wall Street’s long-running pyramid schemes, the economic and fiscal picture is bleak. During the Bush Administration, the national debt, now approaching ten trillion dollars, has nearly doubled. Next year’s federal budget is projected to run a half-trillion-dollar deficit, a precipitous fall from the seven-hundred-billion-dollar surplus that was projected when Bill Clinton left office. Private-sector job creation has been a sixth of what it was under President Clinton. Five million people have fallen into poverty. The number of Americans without health insurance has grown by seven million, while average premiums have nearly doubled. Meanwhile, the principal domestic achievement of the Bush Administration has been to shift the relative burden of taxation from the rich to the rest. For the top one per cent of us, the Bush tax cuts are worth, on average, about a thousand dollars a week; for the bottom fifth, about a dollar and a half. The unfairness will only increase if the painful, yet necessary, effort to rescue the credit markets ends up preventing the rescue of our health-care system, our environment, and our physical, educational, and industrial infrastructure.

At the same time, a hundred and fifty thousand American troops are in Iraq and thirty-three thousand are in Afghanistan. There is still disagreement about the wisdom of overthrowing Saddam Hussein and his horrific regime, but there is no longer the slightest doubt that the Bush Administration manipulated, bullied, and lied the American public into this war and then mismanaged its prosecution in nearly every aspect. The direct costs, besides an expenditure of more than six hundred billion dollars, have included the loss of more than four thousand Americans, the wounding of thirty thousand, the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis, and the displacement of four and a half million men, women, and children. Only now, after American forces have been fighting for a year longer than they did in the Second World War, is there a glimmer of hope that the conflict in Iraq has entered a stage of fragile stability.

The indirect costs, both of the war in particular and of the Administration’s unilateralist approach to foreign policy in general, have also been immense. The torture of prisoners, authorized at the highest level, has been an ethical and a public-diplomacy catastrophe. At a moment when the global environment, the global economy, and global stability all demand a transition to new sources of energy, the United States has been a global retrograde, wasteful in its consumption and heedless in its policy. Strategically and morally, the Bush Administration has squandered the American capacity to counter the example and the swagger of its rivals. China, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other illiberal states have concluded, each in its own way, that democratic principles and human rights need not be components of a stable, prosperous future. At recent meetings of the United Nations, emboldened despots like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran came to town sneering at our predicament and hailing the “end of the American era.”

The election of 2008 is the first in more than half a century in which no incumbent President or Vice-President is on the ballot. There is, however, an incumbent party, and that party has been lucky enough to find itself, apparently against the wishes of its “base,” with a nominee who evidently disliked George W. Bush before it became fashionable to do so. In South Carolina in 2000, Bush crushed John McCain with a sub-rosa primary campaign of such viciousness that McCain lashed out memorably against Bush’s Christian-right allies. So profound was McCain’s anger that in 2004 he flirted with the possibility of joining the Democratic ticket under John Kerry. Bush, who took office as a “compassionate conservative,” governed immediately as a rightist ideologue. During that first term, McCain bolstered his reputation, sometimes deserved, as a “maverick” willing to work with Democrats on such issues as normalizing relations with Vietnam, campaign-finance reform, and immigration reform. He co-sponsored, with John Edwards and Edward Kennedy, a patients’ bill of rights. In 2001 and 2003, he voted against the Bush tax cuts. With John Kerry, he co-sponsored a bill raising auto-fuel efficiency standards and, with Joseph Lieberman, a cap-and-trade regime on carbon emissions. He was one of a minority of Republicans opposed to unlimited drilling for oil and gas off America’s shores.

Since the 2004 election, however, McCain has moved remorselessly rightward in his quest for the Republican nomination. He paid obeisance to Jerry Falwell and preachers of his ilk. He abandoned immigration reform, eventually coming out against his own bill. Most shocking, McCain, who had repeatedly denounced torture under all circumstances, voted in February against a ban on the very techniques of “enhanced interrogation” that he himself once endured in Vietnam—as long as the torturers were civilians employed by the C.I.A.

On almost every issue, McCain and the Democratic Party’s nominee, Barack Obama, speak the generalized language of “reform,” but only Obama has provided a convincing, rational, and fully developed vision. McCain has abandoned his opposition to the Bush-era tax cuts and has taken up the demagogic call—in the midst of recession and Wall Street calamity, with looming crises in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—for more tax cuts. Bush’s expire in 2011. If McCain, as he has proposed, cuts taxes for corporations and estates, the benefits once more would go disproportionately to the wealthy.

In Washington, the craze for pure market triumphalism is over. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson arrived in town (via Goldman Sachs) a Republican, but it seems that he will leave a Democrat. In other words, he has come to see that the abuses that led to the current financial crisis––not least, excessive speculation on borrowed capital––can be fixed only with government regulation and oversight. McCain, who has never evinced much interest in, or knowledge of, economic questions, has had little of substance to say about the crisis. His most notable gesture of concern—a melodramatic call last month to suspend his campaign and postpone the first Presidential debate until the government bailout plan was ready—soon revealed itself as an empty diversionary tactic.

By contrast, Obama has made a serious study of the mechanics and the history of this economic disaster and of the possibilities of stimulating a recovery. Last March, in New York, in a speech notable for its depth, balance, and foresight, he said, “A complete disdain for pay-as-you-go budgeting, coupled with a generally scornful attitude towards oversight and enforcement, allowed far too many to put short-term gain ahead of long-term consequences.” Obama is committed to reforms that value not only the restoration of stability but also the protection of the vast majority of the population, which did not partake of the fruits of the binge years. He has called for greater and more programmatic regulation of the financial system; the creation of a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank, which would help reverse the decay of our roads, bridges, and mass-transit systems, and create millions of jobs; and a major investment in the green-energy sector.

On energy and global warming, Obama offers a set of forceful proposals. He supports a cap-and-trade program to reduce America’s carbon emissions by eighty per cent by 2050—an enormously ambitious goal, but one that many climate scientists say must be met if atmospheric carbon dioxide is to be kept below disastrous levels. Large emitters, like utilities, would acquire carbon allowances, and those which emit less carbon dioxide than their allotment could sell the resulting credits to those which emit more; over time, the available allowances would decline. Significantly, Obama wants to auction off the allowances; this would provide fifteen billion dollars a year for developing alternative-energy sources and creating job-training programs in green technologies. He also wants to raise federal fuel-economy standards and to require that ten per cent of America’s electricity be generated from renewable sources by 2012. Taken together, his proposals represent the most coherent and far-sighted strategy ever offered by a Presidential candidate for reducing the nation’s reliance on fossil fuels.

There was once reason to hope that McCain and Obama would have a sensible debate about energy and climate policy. McCain was one of the first Republicans in the Senate to support federal limits on carbon dioxide, and he has touted his own support for a less ambitious cap-and-trade program as evidence of his independence from the White House. But, as polls showed Americans growing jittery about gasoline prices, McCain apparently found it expedient in this area, too, to shift course. He took a dubious idea—lifting the federal moratorium on offshore oil drilling—and placed it at the very center of his campaign. Opening up America’s coastal waters to drilling would have no impact on gasoline prices in the short term, and, even over the long term, the effect, according to a recent analysis by the Department of Energy, would be “insignificant.” Such inconvenient facts, however, are waved away by a campaign that finally found its voice with the slogan “Drill, baby, drill!”

The contrast between the candidates is even sharper with respect to the third branch of government. A tense equipoise currently prevails among the Justices of the Supreme Court, where four hard-core conservatives face off against four moderate liberals. Anthony M. Kennedy is the swing vote, determining the outcome of case after case.

McCain cites Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, two reliable conservatives, as models for his own prospective appointments. If he means what he says, and if he replaces even one moderate on the current Supreme Court, then Roe v. Wade will be reversed, and states will again be allowed to impose absolute bans on abortion. McCain’s views have hardened on this issue. In 1999, he said he opposed overturning Roe; by 2006, he was saying that its demise “wouldn’t bother me any”; by 2008, he no longer supported adding rape and incest as exceptions to his party’s platform opposing abortion.

But scrapping Roe—which, after all, would leave states as free to permit abortion as to criminalize it—would be just the beginning. Given the ideological agenda that the existing conservative bloc has pursued, it’s safe to predict that affirmative action of all kinds would likely be outlawed by a McCain Court. Efforts to expand executive power, which, in recent years, certain Justices have nobly tried to resist, would likely increase. Barriers between church and state would fall; executions would soar; legal checks on corporate power would wither—all with just one new conservative nominee on the Court. And the next President is likely to make three appointments.

Obama, who taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, voted against confirming not only Roberts and Alito but also several unqualified lower-court nominees. As an Illinois state senator, he won the support of prosecutors and police organizations for new protections against convicting the innocent in capital cases. While McCain voted to continue to deny habeas-corpus rights to detainees, perpetuating the Bush Administration’s regime of state-sponsored extra-legal detention, Obama took the opposite side, pushing to restore the right of all U.S.-held prisoners to a hearing. The judicial future would be safe in his care.

In the shorthand of political commentary, the Iraq war seems to leave McCain and Obama roughly even. Opposing it before the invasion, Obama had the prescience to warn of a costly and indefinite occupation and rising anti-American radicalism around the world; supporting it, McCain foresaw none of this. More recently, in early 2007 McCain risked his Presidential prospects on the proposition that five additional combat brigades could salvage a war that by then appeared hopeless. Obama, along with most of the country, had decided that it was time to cut American losses. Neither candidate’s calculations on Iraq have been as cheaply political as McCain’s repeated assertion that Obama values his career over his country; both men based their positions, right or wrong, on judgment and principle.

President Bush’s successor will inherit two wars and the realities of limited resources, flagging popular will, and the dwindling possibilities of what can be achieved by American power. McCain’s views on these subjects range from the simplistic to the unknown. In Iraq, he seeks “victory”—a word that General David Petraeus refuses to use, and one that fundamentally misrepresents the messy, open-ended nature of the conflict. As for Afghanistan, on the rare occasions when McCain mentions it he implies that the surge can be transferred directly from Iraq, which suggests that his grasp of counterinsurgency is not as firm as he insisted it was during the first Presidential debate. McCain always displays more faith in force than interest in its strategic consequences. Unlike Obama, McCain has no political strategy for either war, only the dubious hope that greater security will allow things to work out. Obama has long warned of deterioration along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and has a considered grasp of its vital importance. His strategy for both Afghanistan and Iraq shows an understanding of the role that internal politics, economics, corruption, and regional diplomacy play in wars where there is no battlefield victory.

Unimaginably painful personal experience taught McCain that war is above all a test of honor: maintain the will to fight on, be prepared to risk everything, and you will prevail. Asked during the first debate to outline “the lessons of Iraq,” McCain said, “I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear: that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict.” A soldier’s answer––but a statesman must have a broader view of war and peace. The years ahead will demand not only determination but also diplomacy, flexibility, patience, judiciousness, and intellectual engagement. These are no more McCain’s strong suit than the current President’s. Obama, for his part, seems to know that more will be required than willpower and force to extract some advantage from the wreckage of the Bush years.

Obama is also better suited for the task of renewing the bedrock foundations of American influence. An American restoration in foreign affairs will require a commitment not only to international coöperation but also to international institutions that can address global warming, the dislocations of what will likely be a deepening global economic crisis, disease epidemics, nuclear proliferation, terrorism, and other, more traditional security challenges. Many of the Cold War-era vehicles for engagement and negotiation—the United Nations, the World Bank, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty regime, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization—are moribund, tattered, or outdated. Obama has the generational outlook that will be required to revive or reinvent these compacts. He would be the first postwar American President unencumbered by the legacies of either Munich or Vietnam.

The next President must also restore American moral credibility. Closing Guantánamo, banning all torture, and ending the Iraq war as responsibly as possible will provide a start, but only that. The modern Presidency is as much a vehicle for communication as for decision-making, and the relevant audiences are global. Obama has inspired many Americans in part because he holds up a mirror to their own idealism. His election would do no less—and likely more—overseas.

What most distinguishes the candidates, however, is character—and here, contrary to conventional wisdom, Obama is clearly the stronger of the two. Not long ago, Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager, said, “This election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.” The view that this election is about personalities leaves out policy, complexity, and accountability. Even so, there’s some truth in what Davis said––but it hardly points to the conclusion that he intended.

Echoing Obama, McCain has made “change” one of his campaign mantras. But the change he has actually provided has been in himself, and it is not just a matter of altering his positions. A willingness to pander and even lie has come to define his Presidential campaign and its televised advertisements. A contemptuous duplicity, a meanness, has entered his talk on the stump—so much so that it seems obvious that, in the drive for victory, he is willing to replicate some of the same underhanded methods that defeated him eight years ago in South Carolina.

Perhaps nothing revealed McCain’s cynicism more than his choice of Sarah Palin, the former mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, who had been governor of that state for twenty-one months, as the Republican nominee for Vice-President. In the interviews she has given since her nomination, she has had difficulty uttering coherent unscripted responses about the most basic issues of the day. We are watching a candidate for Vice-President cram for her ongoing exam in elementary domestic and foreign policy. This is funny as a Tina Fey routine on “Saturday Night Live,” but as a vision of the political future it’s deeply unsettling. Palin has no business being the backup to a President of any age, much less to one who is seventy-two and in imperfect health. In choosing her, McCain committed an act of breathtaking heedlessness and irresponsibility. Obama’s choice, Joe Biden, is not without imperfections. His tongue sometimes runs in advance of his mind, providing his own fodder for late-night comedians, but there is no comparison with Palin. His deep experience in foreign affairs, the judiciary, and social policy makes him an assuring and complementary partner for Obama.

The longer the campaign goes on, the more the issues of personality and character have reflected badly on McCain. Unless appearances are very deceiving, he is impulsive, impatient, self-dramatizing, erratic, and a compulsive risk-taker. These qualities may have contributed to his usefulness as a “maverick” senator. But in a President they would be a menace.

By contrast, Obama’s transformative message is accompanied by a sense of pragmatic calm. A tropism for unity is an essential part of his character and of his campaign. It is part of what allowed him to overcome a Democratic opponent who entered the race with tremendous advantages. It is what helped him forge a political career relying both on the liberals of Hyde Park and on the political regulars of downtown Chicago. His policy preferences are distinctly liberal, but he is determined to speak to a broad range of Americans who do not necessarily share his every value or opinion. For some who oppose him, his equanimity even under the ugliest attack seems like hauteur; for some who support him, his reluctance to counterattack in the same vein seems like self-defeating detachment. Yet it is Obama’s temperament—and not McCain’s—that seems appropriate for the office both men seek and for the volatile and dangerous era in which we live. Those who dismiss his centeredness as self-centeredness or his composure as indifference are as wrong as those who mistook Eisenhower’s stolidity for denseness or Lincoln’s humor for lack of seriousness.

Nowadays, almost every politician who thinks about running for President arranges to become an author. Obama’s books are different: he wrote them. “The Audacity of Hope” (2006) is a set of policy disquisitions loosely structured around an account of his freshman year in the United States Senate. Though a campaign manifesto of sorts, it is superior to that genre’s usual blowsy pastiche of ghostwritten speeches. But it is Obama’s first book, “Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance” (1995), that offers an unprecedented glimpse into the mind and heart of a potential President. Obama began writing it in his early thirties, before he was a candidate for anything. Not since Theodore Roosevelt has an American politician this close to the pinnacle of power produced such a sustained, highly personal work of literary merit before being definitively swept up by the tides of political ambition.

A Presidential election is not the awarding of a Pulitzer Prize: we elect a politician and, we hope, a statesman, not an author. But Obama’s first book is valuable in the way that it reveals his fundamental attitudes of mind and spirit. “Dreams from My Father” is an illuminating memoir not only in the substance of Obama’s own peculiarly American story but also in the qualities he brings to the telling: a formidable intelligence, emotional empathy, self-reflection, balance, and a remarkable ability to see life and the world through the eyes of people very different from himself. In common with nearly all other senators and governors of his generation, Obama does not count military service as part of his biography. But his life has been full of tests—personal, spiritual, racial, political—that bear on his preparation for great responsibility.

It is perfectly legitimate to call attention, as McCain has done, to Obama’s lack of conventional national and international policymaking experience. We, too, wish he had more of it. But office-holding is not the only kind of experience relevant to the task of leading a wildly variegated nation. Obama’s immersion in diverse human environments (Hawaii’s racial rainbow, Chicago’s racial cauldron, countercultural New York, middle-class Kansas, predominantly Muslim Indonesia), his years of organizing among the poor, his taste of corporate law and his grounding in public-interest and constitutional law—these, too, are experiences. And his books show that he has wrung from them every drop of insight and breadth of perspective they contained.

The exhaustingly, sometimes infuriatingly long campaign of 2008 (and 2007) has had at least one virtue: it has demonstrated that Obama’s intelligence and steady temperament are not just figments of the writer’s craft. He has made mistakes, to be sure. (His failure to accept McCain’s imaginative proposal for a series of unmediated joint appearances was among them.) But, on the whole, his campaign has been marked by patience, planning, discipline, organization, technological proficiency, and strategic astuteness. Obama has often looked two or three moves ahead, relatively impervious to the permanent hysteria of the hourly news cycle and the cable-news shouters. And when crisis has struck, as it did when the divisive antics of his ex-pastor threatened to bring down his campaign, he has proved equal to the moment, rescuing himself with a speech that not only drew the poison but also demonstrated a profound respect for the electorate. Although his opponents have tried to attack him as a man of “mere” words, Obama has returned eloquence to its essential place in American politics. The choice between experience and eloquence is a false one––something that Lincoln, out of office after a single term in Congress, proved in his own campaign of political and national renewal. Obama’s “mere” speeches on everything from the economy and foreign affairs to race have been at the center of his campaign and its success; if he wins, his eloquence will be central to his ability to govern.

We cannot expect one man to heal every wound, to solve every major crisis of policy. So much of the Presidency, as they say, is a matter of waking up in the morning and trying to drink from a fire hydrant. In the quiet of the Oval Office, the noise of immediate demands can be deafening. And yet Obama has precisely the temperament to shut out the noise when necessary and concentrate on the essential. The election of Obama—a man of mixed ethnicity, at once comfortable in the world and utterly representative of twenty-first-century America—would, at a stroke, reverse our country’s image abroad and refresh its spirit at home. His ascendance to the Presidency would be a symbolic culmination of the civil- and voting-rights acts of the nineteen-sixties and the century-long struggles for equality that preceded them. It could not help but say something encouraging, even exhilarating, about the country, about its dedication to tolerance and inclusiveness, about its fidelity, after all, to the values it proclaims in its textbooks.

At a moment of economic calamity, international perplexity, political failure, and battered morale, America needs both uplift and realism, both change and steadiness. It needs a leader temperamentally, intellectually, and emotionally attuned to the complexities of our troubled globe. That leader’s name is Barack Obama.

Photo and story stolen shamelessly from one of my favorite blogs, Admiral Cod's post yesterday.

Tasseled Loafers: Shoes of the Counter-Revolution"In France, the tasseled loafer makes its own peculiar political statement. John Vinocur, the executive editor of The International Herald Tribune, said that the shoes were worn, actually flaunted, by young rightists in the mid-1980's who wished to demonstrate their distaste for the Socialist Government...To them, the preppiness of the shoe represented American prosperity and free-market conservatism. Thus, it became part of the battle uniform of the young soldier of la contre-revolution."The Politicization of Tassel Loafers, Neil A. Lewis, New York Times, 03/11/93Posted by Laguna Beach Trad at 10:04

Thursday, October 9, 2008

As a young man how was I to know there were rules about proper ways to dress?

In the era and neighborhood I grew up in, every guy dressed in a mixture of preppy/trad. We had no notion that other forms of dressing existed. I still dress that way, as do most of my friends. The neighborhood stores still feature mostly preppy togs.

Out of high school I had a month or two to between graduation and basic training so went to work for a men's haberdashery. I got to be a shoe dog. Knowing absolutely nothing about shoes, I relied upon my boss, Ralph, who was a most excellent teacher.

Ralph spent a great deal of time attempting to educate a clueless teen about the advantages of Allen Edmonds over Johnson & Murphy's, and why Weejuns were crap. Didn't matter to me, Weejuns were $8 per pair the others were $40.

Ralph did one thing I am grateful for, When the J&M's went on sale, he took a pair of black and a pair of brown tassel loafers put them aside for me and insisted I buy them, since I would need them when I was an adult. I still have those two pair.

Throughout my working career, although all day every day I was encased in a BB gray or blue suit, I never owned a pair of lace up shoes. It was the black or brown J&M tassels or a pair of penny loafers. At home it was pennys or Topsiders. Then I found Scott.

Each day Scott walks around NY taking pictures of "real" people who dress with flair. One of his earliest postings was a copy of an essay by men's style guru G. Bruce Boyer(whose picture is shown above) describing Mr. Boyer's introduction to the world of bespoke clothing. A later posting was an essay by Bruce on the joys of suede shoes. The scales fell from my eyes.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Ms. Reed is a Greenville, Mississippi native who made good in New York as a writer, editor and reporter, for Vogue and Newsweek,decided she wanted to be closer to home so moved to New Orleans some twenty years ago, and became over time one of those indomitable Southern women who knows everyone, gets involved in local affairs and changes the lives of everyone around her

Early this summer I read a book review of "The House on First Street",and was immediately taken by it. I went to the local library, reserved a copy and found I was like number 99 in line. So to keep me occupied I ordered "Queen of the Turtle Derby", also by Ms. Reed, which arrived just as the hurricanes were lined up at New Orleans back door.

Last Monday the local librarian called to let me know it was my turn to read the long awaited "House". I didn't put it down until I finished.

The House on First Street is a love song to New Orleans, its people, its character,and mores. It is also tangently about the Reed household on First Street which they moved into a month before Katrina hit their beloved city.

It will make you laugh, it will make you cry, and in the end you too will fall in love with a great storyteller.

Monday, October 6, 2008

Growing up in the Man in the Gray Flannel suit era, young men had very few truly fashionable style icons with which to wish to emulate. Even Cary Grant couldn't be Cary Grant, and Coop was a bit out of touch. Fortunately, I grabbed onto David Frost pretty early.

Sir David Frost is a British television presenter, noted interviewer, frequent guest on the talk show circuit, and producer of several well received documentries. In the 60's and 70's he was ubiquitous on American television, each time he would show up in his immaculately cut Saville Row suit, loud stripe or check Turnbull and Asser or Hilditch and Key shirts and red socks.

For those new to Sir David, may I suggest you review the Frost/Nixon tapes from 1977. David sold everything he had to get these interviews made. At the time they were the most widely watch interview ever shown. Nixon went so far as to admit mistakes, but never incriminated himself. The series has since become the basis for the Tony award winning play Frost/Nixon, and the movie version will be out soon.

I've never been able to afford Saville Row, but have since emulated his shirts and have always prefered red socks to all others.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Mrs T and I had dinner the other night with our old friend and former neighbor, Secret Agent Man. Sam had the opportunity to fulfill a life long dream when in his early 30's he became a member of the Secret Service.

I frankly haven't a clue what he does for a living, except to know he is currently rotating through a tour as a member of the President's advance crew. That is more than enough for me to know.

While it is certainly work I would not seek out, I'm proud of him for the works he does. Depending upon the rotation I suspect that the real danger to the job comes in the monotony of imagining bad guys under every rock. When push comes to shove, there are entire legions of people I would be unwilling to unquestionably surrender my life for. Most of them live in or around Washington DC.

Friday, October 3, 2008

The 16 ounce Blackwatch Modern Tartan cloth arrived today from the Tweed Store. I have an appointment with our tailor Monday, who will convert it into a one button, single breasted sport coat with side vents, flap and ticket pockets. It should be ready in 3 to 4 weeks.

Additionally, the second choice tweed fabric arrived from British Fabric yesterday. I will have this made into a near identical jacket immediately after the tartan is ready. Ideally, I wanted this one first, as the colors are better for fall, but I wanted to make absolutely certain to have the tartan by Thanksgiving.

If this is your first visit stop in and say hello on our comments page.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Gentlemen: Perhaps I left you with the false impression that my earlier missive concerned dates one or two only. Nothing could be further from the truth. Blame for the local shortage of men with good manners will not be laid at your feet. Therefore, most of the commandments apply, always.

So, if you're still reading, undoubtedly, you followed the rules, and you found your first date went much better than most. What you do not yet understand is why.

Toad is here to help. Suspend disbelief. Almost everything you knew about dating is wrong. But you will come out smarter and stronger in the end.

Commandment 11: Respect yourselfEvery guy has his toughest critic. It may be your sister, cousin, co worker, or mom. Your toughest critic loves you enough to give it to you straight first time, every time. Don't let them down.

If you could not proudly introduce your date to your TC, you have got the wrong date. When in doubt trust your TC.

Commandment 12: Change perspective 180 degreesLet me let you in on the greatest dating secret you'll ever learn. It is this: Boys and girls want the same thing. However, there is only one path to the goal. Hers. You cannot force, bluster or bully your way there. Slow down, listen, learn.

Commandment 13: BS stinksBe yourself. Confidence is sexy. A whiff of BS is easily discerned and is strictly for losers.

Women have far more sensitive noses than men. And longer memories.

Commandment 14: Clean up your nestWhen you chose to date you made a decision about yourself. You decided you were an interesting fellow, a man worth meeting, a person of value. An inspired choice.

Gentlemen of these values, do not live in sty's. Your an adult now. If you need specific help, get in touch, but remember this. Visitors to your home should not be needlessly uncomfortable about their surroundings or by what they may catch.

It may take some time, but little money to clean up and keep it neat.

Commandment 15: Be confident, but trainableNo woman wants a finished product. She will notice that you have had good home training. That is a good thing. What she is seeking is a man who is flexible. Demonstrate that you are trainable and retrainable. You do not always have to be right. If its your way or the highway, hit the road.

Gents I can only carry you so far. Don't wuss out. Now that you know better, you'll do better.

Wednesday, October 1, 2008

It has been 10 years, today or thereabouts, since I removed my shingle and retired from the affairs of the city and to the life of a country gentleman. It was one of the happiest days of my life, and I never looked back.

I believe it was easier for me than for many men because throughout my career I always worked to live, rather than lived to work. Certainly, I cared for my clients, and employers, but by the time my generation came around company loyalty was proven to be a non-existant joke, so I never, ever bought into the the notion that I was, was what I did.

Retirement is so refreshing. Some unexpected surprises: I am the only American over 10 without a cell phone. Don't have an Ipod, don't commute anywhere, and keep much better hours. Stress? A thing of the past.